Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: ARossi Date: May 12, 2010 7:34pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Community: A New Name for “Open Source” Collections

Hi Gerry,

Thanks for your comments. The name change wasn't intended to set software in opposition to literature, or to make any value judgment on the content submitted.

If you go read the definition of Open Source at the link in my original post, I think you'll see why we felt the name wasn't appropriate for these collections. To sum up the pertinent points; Open Source implies allowing free redistribution of the work, giving access to the source material used to make it, and allowing people to use the work to make derivatives.

Community uploaders can certainly join in the spirit of Open Source by putting an appropriate Creative Commons license on their work, but we do not *require* people to do this for their uploads. We want people to share their work at a level of openness that is comfortable for them.

Thanks for taking the time to comment, and I hope you'll enjoy all of the content in our collections (Community or not!). :-)

Alexis

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Time Traveller Date: May 12, 2010 8:10pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Community: A New Name for “Open Source” Collections

"Open Source" is more descriptive than "community"

And I suspect the IA has been watching the popularity of the social networking sites like Face Book where its all about "community" and has decided to jump on the bandwagon.

Rather than changing names which is just cosmetic, why not make changes that matter, such as more reliable uploading, and the most recent request, better means of cataloguing, as that problem is only going to get worse, seeing how many uploads per hour nowadays.

Signed,

Outspoken melon-throwing Peter.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: garthus Date: May 13, 2010 7:15am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Community: A New Name for “Open Source” Collections

Alexis,

"Open Source implies allowing free redistribution of the work, giving access to the source material used to make it, and allowing people to use the work to make derivatives."

If you look at my work you will see that this is exactly what I do with my poetry, Literature and scientific papers; free access, free use, and free reuse; only requirement is that derivative works have to also be freely distributed.

With 'artificial intelligence', the day will soon come when computer code will be treated exactly as human writing is treated or will cyborg communities be discriminated against because they are not completely human? In fact my new idea for a book (at least I see no interest in the greedy corporate/publishing community for the concept of dynamic books) is for an Object-Oriented type of writing; just like the computer code which takes its name.

We should be encouraging the use of the Creative Commons license as this will help place more nails in the coffins of the corrupt intellectual property industry. Less restriction fosters more creativity regardless of what the material is called.


See:

http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=zoe%20garthus%20AND%20collection%3Aopensource

Gerry

This post was modified by garthus on 2010-05-13 14:10:55

This post was modified by garthus on 2010-05-13 14:15:21